Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Businesses The Internet

China In the Habit of Copying and Redirecting US Sites? 468

Want to know why US web companies have trouble making it in China? gaz_hayes passed us a link to the blog commiepod, which suggests that successful US websites are targeted by 'Chinese government backed companies.' "These companies copy the site, deploy it on a .cn domain, and then DNS poison or forcefully lower the bandwidth the US site. Just a few weeks ago google.com and google.cn were DNS poisoned across the entire Chinese internet and were being redirected to their Chinese competitor Baidu. This probably explains Google's 3rd quarter market share in China." This is a fairly serious accusation; anyone else have first-hand experiences that would back this up?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China In the Habit of Copying and Redirecting US Sites?

Comments Filter:
  • by foobsr ( 693224 ) * on Sunday November 18, 2007 @05:53PM (#21400801) Homepage Journal
    "Replacement of Google with Alternative Search Systems in China — Documentation and Screen Shots"
    http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/china/google-replacements/ [harvard.edu]
    Last Updated: September 24, 2002

    On this basis: "Google censors itself for China" — http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4645596.stm [bbc.co.uk] — Wednesday, 25 January 2006

    Define ethics and business ethics within the context of a multi-billion dollar market. Do not be shy!

    CC.
  • by rolfwind ( 528248 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @05:53PM (#21400807)
    AFAIK, no outside (foreign) interests can own more than 49% of any Chinese enterprise - that way the Chinese retain the controlling interest of their companies.

    Google may have a part of Baidu, but MS had a piece of Apple in the late 90s or 2000s as well (part of a lawsuit agreement IIRC) yet nobody could realisitically accuse MS on whether or not they cared if their OS remain dominant or if they wouldn't mind ceding market to Apple.
  • quite. (Score:5, Informative)

    by apodyopsis ( 1048476 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @05:55PM (#21400821)
    No surprise.

    I used to work in China quite alot and found the only way I could get decent Internet access and get things done was to VPN back to the UK office and then surf from their gateway - the slight delay was quite alot better then the local service.

    I got used to shitty performance, websites suddenly dying for no reason, 30 second delays on some sites and others almost instant.

    As with most things Chinese, we may see this at dodgy behavior - to them it is a normal business practice. As I once stated on a thread about Chinese knockoffs the problem is not to "stop them doing it" but is rather "to make them understand they are doing something wrong in the first place".
  • by thx1138_az ( 163286 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @06:13PM (#21400977)

    AFAIK, no outside (foreign) interests can own more than 49% of any Chinese enterprise

    That's not technically true... You can own more than 50% of a Chinese company but you, as a foreigner, still can never have a controlling interest. It's funny how that works over there.
  • My stuff got copied (Score:5, Informative)

    by harmonica ( 29841 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @06:19PM (#21401011)
    Someone has copied a number of pages from my site. A link to my original URL was included, though. When I finally found a mail address, the person replying was apologetic and claimed to only have done it because my pages were so slow to access from China. He/She removed the page, but there were copies later of other pages. I gave up asking for removal -- it cost me a lot of time just finding the mail address in that case. Everything is in Chinese. It's a bit annoying, but there's not much I think I can do and I don't think anyone's trying to steal from me.
  • by Harmonious Botch ( 921977 ) * on Sunday November 18, 2007 @06:21PM (#21401031) Homepage Journal
    It works the same here in the US. There are many types of shares: some voting, some non-voting, some that confer a vote only in special circumstances. So a person can own 100 percent of the non-voting shares - which may be the vast majority of the value of the company - and still not be able to vote.
  • by LynnwoodRooster ( 966895 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @06:52PM (#21401255) Journal
    The actual answer is "it depends"...

    For a manufacturing company, you as a foreigner can own - and control - 100% of a company. For a technical/service firm, you can own 60%. For a trading company, you can own 40%. So it really depends upon what the type of company is.

    China's also opened up so that foreigners can now outright own houses or apartments, something even Mexico doesn't allow...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 18, 2007 @06:57PM (#21401299)
    Google /had/ a 2.6% stake in Baidu, but it sold that off in mid-2006. So no, Google does not own any part of Baidu.
  • by Alascom ( 95042 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @07:11PM (#21401403)
    Google owned 5% of Bidu at the IPO. They sold their interest in Bidu almost 18 months ago.
  • by br00tus ( 528477 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @07:11PM (#21401411)
    I agree China is not socialist. The vast majority of communists that still exist in the world do not consider it so. They date it somewhere between Mao making nice with Nixon and Deng Xiaoping coming to power. Remember that Deng Xiaoping was considered to be one of the biggest villains during the Cultural Revolution.

    Karl Marx founded communism on materialist principles, not utopian ones. It doesn't mean all of his theories are correct, but they are not utopian. In fact he founded his school of thought in response to utopian socialist/communist ideologies of the time. I don't know how rational our system is with the president talking about God all the time and appealing to his base with his supposdely shared belief that some Jew 2000 years ago had magic powers.

    Marxism is scientific insofar as it is consciously built on materialist, scientific notions. It is not scientific insofar as when it is incorrect. I would say even most educated Americans I know have no arguments against Marxian thought since they know nothing of it. They say "People will not act a certain way because human nature is..." or something like that which is never a scientific, rational argument. There are strong arguments against Marxian thought, but they are more along the lines of "Marx's economic system does not translate values to prices correctly". But most Americans, even educated ones, know too little about Marxism to make arguments against them.

    Also, while Marx's socialism involves a proletariat-directed taking over of the economy by the state, there are other forms of socialism, like the anarcho-syndicalists who think economic decisions should be made by workers at their place of employment. Or people who advocate workers councils and so on. Many on the left question whether the USSR was what Marx intended, and Lenin himself talked about pulling away from socialism during the New Economic Policy. Only to Americans does socialism mean big government versus small government, in Europe it means who will control the "means of production".

  • by Goalie_Ca ( 584234 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @07:26PM (#21401509)
    Hah. slashdot.cn [slashdot.cn] redirects to digbuzz which looks like a total rip-off of digg.
  • by gordgekko ( 574109 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @07:51PM (#21401687) Homepage
    No it does not work the same in the U.S. and I wonder who modded you. There is no law specifically barring foreigners from taking control of American companies with the limited exceptions posed by national security issues.

    In America they urge you to "Buy American". In China they put a gun to your head and tell you to buy Chinese apparently.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 18, 2007 @08:02PM (#21401751)
    1. Wikipedia is redirected to Baidu knows [baidu.com], which is a copycat (I would call it plagiarism) of wikipedia minus all "unwanted" information of the Chinese government.
    2. youtube is redirected to 6 rooms [6.cn], another idea copycat.
  • by asg1 ( 1180423 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @09:40PM (#21402437)
    And also linked from www.digbuzz.com [digbuzz.com] is a site named "Solidot", which looks like a total rip-off of Slashdot: solidot.org [solidot.org].
  • Some real info (Score:5, Informative)

    by Conspire ( 102879 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @09:54PM (#21402501) Homepage
    OK, I see a lot of posts here with some misleading info. Just to clear the air:

    1. Foreign companies can own 100% of China enterprises (in some industries), and this is called a WOFE (Wholly Owned Foreign Enterprise)

    2. For any company to operate a web site in China, they need an ICP (Internet Content Provider) license.

    3. Only domestic PRC entities (citizens), can get an ICP license (any foreign ownership and ICP license cannot be issued)

    4. There are ways around #2+#3, through a legal loophole which is quite simply, a) the foreign company has their in country manager or other domestic person setup a 100% domestic owned PRC company to get the ICP license. b) the foreign company has a proxy agreement and share pledge with the "official" shareholder(s) of that PRC domestic company which are side contracts giving control and management of the domestic company to the foreign owned (WOFE) of the foreign investors. c) The WOFE also has a contract with the PRC company to extract all revenue out through a "technical services and management agreements". d) The WOFE then is able to book all the revenue from the company, making it a synthetic subsidiary and thus getting around all the laws forbidding foreign investment in the PRC company. (interesting note, this structure was designed in the 70's to get around foreign investment limitations in petrochemical industries, and is now used by all the major internet and game companies listed abroad, ie: tom.com, sina.com, snda.com, Google, Yahoo etc.)

    5. The telcos here (China Netcom and China Telecom) often seem to re-direct traffic as the post claims. I have seen google.com traffic redirected for an entire weekend to 114.cn, which is China Telecom's lame search engine! Baidu.com redirect I see much less often. There are also many others for instance ALL traffic was redirecting to Yahoo.cn on my cable broadband connection from my house yesterday, no idea why Yahoo.cn, but it was.

    6. A lot of traffic to the China internet portal kings is fake, by fake think how gold farming in MMOGs works, people playing for gold and getting paid 0.50 cents an hour to play in China. I have heard *rumors* from insider friends saying that many portals pay people the equivalent to click on links all day.....think market cap and ad revenue reporting.....it would not surprise me in the least but I can't say I have seen it personally.

  • by Conspire ( 102879 ) on Sunday November 18, 2007 @10:02PM (#21402535) Homepage
    These are flawed numbers. In China according to 2007 corporate law foreigners can own 100% of technical/services firms, trading companies, factories, and a whole lot more. Please see my other post in the parent discussion for details on how any limitations still lingering in the law can be worked around legally.
  • by Conspire ( 102879 ) on Monday November 19, 2007 @12:13AM (#21403383) Homepage
    Note that some of the biggest corruption I have seen in China are orchestrated with the help of US and other foreign investors, corporations, etc.

    Take for example a large NASDAQ listed company, that was under internal investigation last year. I can't name names, but this is second hand knowledge from someone I know involved as a customer to this company and questioned in the investigation. Here goes:

    1. NASDAQ listed company founders and management write a huge option on their shares with a foreign bank. The shares are in lockup and due to be able to float in 6 months. The price that the bank pays, is based on a price they can sell (estimated) at the end of the lockup period in 6 months.

    2. Investigation begins, because of revenues being booked through companies the auditors (and competitors) have never heard of. It comes to light in the investigation, that the revenues are actually the proceeds from the share option sale (management and founders), to drive up stock price before the end of the lockup period.

    3. Underwriters, major investors (big names in US and Europe, can't say the names here) are all aware. Auditors are paid off. One board seat is changed. The truth is buried. The news never comes out because too many investors, banks would get burned.

    4. Stock still flying to this day. Fact is the company is a great model, but a big part of the accelerated growth prior to lockup expiring was fraud. Investors, bankers, underwriters knew it. Corruption on a mass scale involving US and European banks and investors.

    So, this is why I call China "the wild east". Things can go very backward fast and it is very hard to see the "real" picture in anything you do here.

    That being said, there are companies, like GE, that do very well in China while staying for the most part very "clean". It is not impossible to succeed in China without being corrupt. But the stories of corruption I have heard involving foreigners number at least on par with those involving locals only.............its a human disease not a "communist" or "socialist" or even "democratic" problem.....its human.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 19, 2007 @02:40AM (#21404319)
    I am currently in China, and I can say with certainty that the average person is not being forced to "buy Chinese." I have seen some TV ads encouraging people to buy Chinese brands, but that's it. Even some industrial goods are often bought from foreign producers--for example, nicer buildings have German elevators, and some bridge builders prefer to use higher-quality American-made joints. On the street, Chinese car brands predominate but I also see Buicks, Volkswagens, and BMWs.

    Back to the issue at hand: while I haven't experienced the website redirecting scam described above, there's nothing to make me believe the Chinese government wouldn't do something like that in order to boost a Chinese company. I personally believe their blocks on blog sites and recently-lifted YouTube block are done in part to force Chinese citizens to use domestic companies which can be more easily monitored and controlled.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...